Benchmark: asdffds - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var big = 4294967285

Tests:

number
((big >> 16) & 0xffff) * 65536 + (big & 0xffff)
bigint
BigInt(big) & BigInt(0xffffffff)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
number
bigint

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:107.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/107.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 107 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
number	1007464832.0 Ops/sec
bigint	7175707.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 2 months ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Definition JSON**

The provided benchmark definition is a JSON object that contains metadata about the test. It defines:

1. **Name**: A unique identifier for the benchmark.
2. **Description**: An empty string, indicating no description is available.
3. **Script Preparation Code**: A JavaScript code snippet that initializes a large number (`big`) to 4294967285, which is likely used as a constant throughout the test.
4. **Html Preparation Code**: Another empty string, suggesting no HTML preparation is required.

**Individual Test Cases**

The benchmark consists of two individual test cases:

1. **"number"`**: This test case performs an arithmetic operation on the `big` variable:
	* `((big >> 16) & 0xffff)` shifts the bits of `big` right by 16 positions, then masks them with `0xffff` to get a high 16-bit value.
	* Multiples this result by 65536 and adds the low 16-bit mask (`big & 0xffff`) to it.
2. **"bigint"`**: This test case uses the `BigInt` constructor to create large integers from the `big` variable:
	* `BigInt(big)` creates a `BigInt` object with the value of `big`.
	* The bitwise AND operator (`&`) is then applied to this `BigInt` object and another large integer (`0xffffffff`).

**Comparison**

The two test cases are compared in terms of their execution speed, measured as **ExecutionsPerSecond**. This indicates that the benchmark is testing how fast each operation can be performed.

**Options Compared**

In general, the options being compared here are:

* Simple arithmetic operations (shift and mask) vs. using `BigInt` for large integers.
* The use of bitwise operators (`>>`, `&`) in JavaScript's native integer type vs. the larger data type provided by `BigInt`.

**Pros and Cons**

1. **Simple Arithmetic Operations**: Pros:
	* Typically faster execution due to simpler arithmetic operations.
	* Native support, reducing overhead from using a separate library.
Cons:
	* Limited range for integers (typically 32-bit or 64-bit).
2. **BigInt**: Pros:
	* Supports larger integer values (up to 2^1024 - 1).
	* Provides more accurate results in certain arithmetic operations.

Cons:

* Slower execution compared to simple arithmetic.
* Requires additional overhead from the `BigInt` library.

**Library Considerations**

In this benchmark, no libraries are explicitly mentioned. However, `BigInt` is a built-in JavaScript feature introduced in ECMAScript 2016 (ES6). It provides support for large integers and accurate arithmetic operations, making it a good choice when working with large numbers.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

This benchmark doesn't mention any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond the use of `BigInt`. If there were any other advanced features like async/await, generators, or WebAssembly, they would be worth mentioning.

**Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternatives to measure performance or optimize your code, consider:

* Using existing benchmarks and test frameworks (e.g., Benchmark.js, JSPerf).
* Exploring different JavaScript engines (e.g., V8, SpiderMonkey) and their respective optimizations.
* Investigating alternative programming languages or runtime environments that might offer better performance for specific tasks.

In conclusion, this benchmark tests the relative execution speed of simple arithmetic operations versus using `BigInt` for large integers. It's a helpful comparison for developers looking to optimize their JavaScript code for performance-critical tasks.

Related benchmarks:

asdffds (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: number vs bigint

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

number

bigint

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 2 months ago):